Mains Based Current Affairs

November 2018

1. India joins Afghanistan peace talks

Context

In a significant departure from India’s stand on engaging the Taliban, the government announced it would participate at a “non-official” level. Two former senior diplomats attended talks on the Afghanistan peace process which was held in Russia.

Details of the issue

The talks, known as the “Moscow format” will include a “high-level” delegation from the Taliban as well as a delegation of Afghanistan’s “High Peace Council”, along with representatives of 12 countries, and will mark the first time an Indian delegation has been present at the table with the Taliban representatives based in Doha.

“India supports all efforts at peace and reconciliation in Afghanistan that will preserve unity and plurality, and bring security, stability and prosperity to the country. India’s consistent policy has been that such efforts should be Afghan-led, Afghan-owned, and Afghan-controlled and with participation of the Government of Afghanistan,” said MEA spokesperson Raveesh Kumar, adding that “Our participation at the meeting will be at the non-official level.”

The Russian government welcomed India’s decision to participate in the talks on November 9. “We highly regard Indian support in the peace process in Afghanistan and welcome Indian readiness and that of other partner countries in the Moscow format,” a Russian Embassy statement said on Thursday.

“India would have preferred a direct process between the Ghani government and the Taliban, but since that is not possible, a regional process like this one is the next best option. It is to Russia’s credit that they have been able to bring everyone to the table for this round of talks,” former Ambassador to Afghanistan Rakesh Sood told.

Apart from the Taliban leadership based in Doha and the HPC, the Russian government has invited delegations from India, Pakistan, the U.S., China, Iran and five Central Asian Republics.

Background

The Taliban is a Sunni Islamic fundamentalist political movement in Afghanistan which is at present waging war within that country.

It was founded in 1994 and from 1996 to 2001; it was governing the country enforcing a strict interpretation of Islamic or Sharia law.

Many leading Muslims as well as much of the international community were highly critical of the

Taliban government and ways. Taliban then ruled it after 1996 as a totalitarian regime till it was removed by NATO-led

coalition in 2001 forming a new democratically elected government political structure. Hamid Karzai became the first ever democratically elected head of state in 2004 and the current

President is Ashraf Ghani, since 29 September 2014. Even after formation of a democratically elected government and removal of Taliban from

power in Afghanistan, it still faces several internal issues and multipronged attacks by groups like Taliban and ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria).

Taliban still controls very large parts of Afghanistan and insurgency and terrorist forces are still strong in the nation. The control of government is limited only to urban areas and highways in reality.

US led NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) forces have been in Afghanistan in the longest conflict engagement since World War II. They are trying to establish a Government in Afghanistan to a substantial extent and there is a ‘Rule of Law’.

Role of India in Afghanistan

India has focused on development of infrastructure and military aid in Afghanistan. India has aided the overthrow of Taliban and became the largest regional provider of

humanitarian and reconstruction aid to Afghanistan. India wants to improve transport connectivity and economic collaboration with countries in

Central and South Asia. India has invested billions of dollars in Afghanistan and has worked on projects like Salma Dam.

India is also investing in the expansion of Chabahar port in Iran, which will improve its connectivity to Afghanistan and Central Asia.

2. Autonomy of RBI

Note to Students:

This particular editorial analysis takes into account the larger issue of the ongoing turf war between the RBI and the Central Government on a few issues that have caused considerable friction. It also takes into account a recent development where the RBI has been asked to share details sought by the Central Information Commission.

In fact, this is a very relevant topic for students to prepare from the perspective of Indian Economy. Here we have suitably signposted the Editorial Analysis into multiple headings.

1. “Larger Background”: This particular section talks about the broader background of the issue, taking into consideration specific points that may have been featured in previous editions of The Hindu. The thought process behind including this section is to give a ‘storyline’ approach to an aspirant when he/she goes through this topic. 2. “Editorial Analysis”: This particular section gives an insight towards the specific points covered in the specific editorial that is the subject of our study. 3. “The Way Forward/Concluding Remarks”: This sections gives aspirants concluding points that are taken from the article in question as well as some forwarding looking points taken from other articles, as and when required. The important aspect to note here is that the issue being discussed in the news assumes priority over just the article.

Larger Background:

The Government at loggerheads with the RBI:

The government and RBI have been at loggerheads over a few issues for some time now.

The government believed that easing of lending rules for the banks under the prompt corrective action (PCA) framework could help reduce pressure on MSMEs.

However, the regulator stood its ground arguing that such a move would put the clock back and undo clean-up efforts.

Further, with the credit markets tightening after the IL&FS default in September, 2018, non-banking finance companies lobbied the government for more liquidity.

However, the RBI maintained its position since the banking system did not witness any spike in borrowing costs and the market was just repricing risk in an evolving situation.

Reportedly, the government and the RBI disagree on a large number of important issues such as classification of non-performing assets (NPAs) and setting up of a payments regulator independent of the RBI.

A look at the issue concerning setting up of a payments regulator independent of the RBI: Recently, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) said there is no case for having a regulator for payment

systems outside the central bank. The RBI had submitted a dissent note, against certain recommendations of the inter-ministerial

committee for finalization of amendments to the Payment & Settlement Systems Act, 2007. The draft Payment and Settlement System Bill, 2018 had made an important observation. It

said that an independent payments regulatory board (PRB) needs to be established to regulate the payments sector aimed at fostering competition, consumer protection, systemic stability and resilience in the payments sector.

However, according to the RBI’s dissent note, the central bank believes that the PRB must

remain with the central bank and headed by the RBI governor. The RBI and the government may nominate three members each to the board, with a casting vote for the governor.

Crucially, the RBI had cited the report of the Ratan Watal Committee on digital payments as recommending the establishment of the PRB within the overall structure of the RBI, arguing therefore that there is no need for any deviation.

A Note on the Ratan Watal Committee on digital payments:

This Committee on Digital Payments was constituted by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs under the Chairmanship of Shri. Ratan P. Watal, Principal Advisor, NITI Aayog and former Finance Secretary to the Government of India.

In its Report, the Committee had recommended a medium term strategy for accelerating growth of Digital Payments in India with a regulatory regime which is conducive to bridging the Digital divide by promoting competition, open access & interoperability in payments.

The Report recommended inclusion of financially and socially excluded groups and assimilation of emerging technologies in the market, while safeguarding security of Digital Transactions and providing level playing to all stakeholders and new players who will enter this new transaction space.

It had suggested inter-operability of the payments system between banks and non-banks, up-gradation of the digital payment infrastructure and institutions and a framework to reward innovations and for leading efforts in enabling digital payments.

A Closer Look:

The RBI observed that it would prefer the Payments Regulatory Board to function under the purview of the RBI Governor.

“There is no case of having a regulator for payment systems outside the RBI,” the note read. In support of its stance, the RBI stated that the activities of payments banks come well within

the purview of the traditional banking system, which the central bank oversees as the overarching financial regulator.

Thus, according to this logic, it might make better sense to have the RBI oversee the activities of payments banks as well instead of creating a brand new regulator for the growing industry.

The RBI, in essence, is pointing to the interconnection between the payments industry and the banking system to back the extension of its regulatory powers.

In conclusion, the RBI’s case makes good sense when seen from the perspective of the cost of regulatory compliance.

As stated above, there is definite overlapping between the current regulatory powers of the RBI and the proposed regulations for the payments industry.

Further, it is important to note that a unified regulator can thus help in lowering the compliance costs and enabling the seamless implementation of rules.

Also, there is the real risk that a brand new regulator may be unable to match the expertise of the RBI in carrying out necessary regulatory duties.

As a consequence of this, it makes better sense to have the RBI take charge of the rapidly growing payments industry which can ill-afford regulatory errors at this point.

The fact that the RBI has made public its dissent against the Union government’s idea, suggests that the central bank has serious problems with the dilution of its current powers over the financial sector.

However, the RBI’s demand for the centralisation of regulatory powers also brings with it the need for exercising a greater degree of responsibility.

One must note that when we are at a time where there are increasing risks to the stability of

the domestic financial system, both the government and the RBI must look to work together to tackle these risks instead of battling over regulatory powers.

A Brief Note on Section 7:

The RBI is an entity independent of the government as it takes its own decisions. However, in certain instances, it has to listen to the government. This provision in the RBI Act is contained in its Section 7 which says:

(1) The Central Government may from time to time give such directions to the Bank as it may, after consultation with the Governor of the Bank, consider necessary in the public interest. (2) Subject to any such directions, the general superintendence and direction of the affairs and business of the Bank shall be entrusted to a Central Board of Directors which may exercise all powers and do all acts and things which may be exercised or done by the Bank. (3) Save as otherwise provided in regulations made by the Central Board, the Governor and in his absence the Deputy Governor nominated by him in this behalf, shall also have powers of general superintendence and direction of the affairs and the business of the Bank, and may exercise all powers and do all acts and things which may be exercised or done by the Bank.

Thus, it is clear from the above that this section empowers the government to issue directions in public interest to the central bank, which otherwise does not take orders from the government.

Why is it that Section 7 is seen as an extreme measure?

It is important to note that Section 7 has never been used till now. It was not used even when the country was close to default in the dark days of 1991, nor in

the aftermath of the 2008 global financial crisis. Importantly, it is not clear how this Section operates since it has never been used. Some sections believe that this aggressive move could scandalise a section of academia and

experts, while raising questions about the government’s intentions and the impact on the RBI’s autonomy.

A speech made last week by Viral Acharya, the deputy governor of the RBI, which brought the tensions between the RBI and the government to the fore, might have been provoked by the government’s invocation of Section 7.

Position Taken by the RBI & Govt:

The RBI recently came out with a statement. The recent statement put out by the government underlines that the RBI is autonomous but

within the framework of the RBI Act. It is thus clear that the central bank cannot claim absolute autonomy. It is autonomy within the limits set by the government and its extent depends on the subject

and the context. It is important to note that in a democracy, it is unthinkable that we will have an institution

that is so autonomous that it is not answerable to the people. Experts point out that the risk of such an institution is that it will impose its preferences on

society against the latter’s will, which is undemocratic. Experts further add that when seen from this perspective, the limits to the RBI’s autonomy will

be clear.

It is autonomous and accountable to the people ultimately, through the government. The onus is thus on responsible behaviour by both sides.

A Closer Look:

Experts have pointed out that Central bank-government tensions are a common phenomenon.

Successive governments have been in provocative situations with the RBI. On each occasion, the individuals involved defused tensions and found durable solutions outside the Section 7 consultation process.

Experts assert that never before in the 83 years of the RBI’s history, has the Section 7 consultation process been initiated for managing intractable disputes in not one or two, but three policy matters. Post-consultations, the government can give written directions to the RBI in ‘public interest’.

Some experts also assert that the disagreements relate to the RBI’s stringent restrictions on government-run banks whose non-performing assets (NPAs) have grown so much, that the only way of preventing risk spilling from them into the whole financial system is to quarantine their lending.

Another source of friction is government’s insistence that the RBI go soft on power companies defaulting on loan repayments.

The third source of friction is seigniorage, an eternal conflict. The RBI generates surpluses in the various money markets operations it runs. The RBI transfers part of the surpluses to the government, and with the rest it maintains various reserves to draw from in times of financial instability or contingencies. The Finance Ministry wants the RBI to reset the formulae so that larger surpluses become free for transfer to the government. Determined moves of this kind were resisted most recently by Governors Y.V. Reddy and D. Subbarao, both ex-IAS and old Ministry hands.

A Brief History of the long-standing battle:

It is important to note that the long-standing battle between the RBI and the government escalated in 2015.

As a matter of fact, the differences were so sharp that a substitute for the Finance Secretary was nominated to attend the RBI’s Board meetings.

Experts have pointed out that for the first time, an interview with a panel headed by Cabinet Secretary was instituted in the selection process for appointing the RBI Governor. Dr. Patel was chosen through this revamped process. Jaitley was not a member on the selection committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary or of the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC). His views were taken on board informally.

It is important to note that the RBI has in recent years passed on its surpluses in totality to the government, transferring nothing to its own reserves. It is working on a framework that will assess its risk-buffer requirements in a systematic way for determining the transferable surpluses every year.

Still not satisfied, the Ministry has initiated Section 7 consultations for dipping into the RBI’s war chest for ₹3.6 lakh crore. It is believed that for Ministry mandarins, pressuring the RBI comes easier than raising resources through privatisation or expenditure reforms.

Questions arise: Would plugging those with the RBI’s surpluses serve ‘public interest’? Experts have argued that this is political convenience masquerading as public interest.

Some other pressing issues:

One also observes that the RBI is being blamed for the NPAs crisis — though at the height of public outrage over the Nirav Modi scam, critics argue that the government dragged its feet on filling the vacancy of the Deputy Governor in charge of bank supervision and inspections.

Patel was of the view that after decades of relying on public-sector banking background profiles, the job should be opened to a wider, global field of expertise. The panel that shortlisted candidates for approval by the ACC concurred with his opinion. Overcoming the IAS lobby’s resistance, applicants who combined exposure to public-sector banking system with experience at prestigious global banks were included in the shortlist.

But the ACC headed by the Prime Minister returned the shortlist, with a demand for more names, forcing re-advertisement of the vacancy and restarting of the process afresh.

The previous Deputy Governor had retired in mid-2017. The successor was appointed in June 2018. The position remained vacant for nearly 12 months.

Another Tangle- Issue surrounding the CIC and the RBI:

The Reserve Bank of India finds itself in the midst of another tangle. The Central Information Commission (CIC) has recently directed RBI Governor Urjit Patel to

show cause “why maximum penalty should not be imposed on him for” the central bank’s ostensible “defiance” of Supreme Court orders on disclosing the names of wilful defaulters on bank loans worth hundreds of crores of rupees.

One must take note that at the heart of the matter is the issue of burgeoning bad loans at the country’s commercial banks, which by the RBI’s own admission had, at the gross level, surged to 11.6% of all advances as on March 31, 2018, from September 2017’s 10.2% level.

What the charge against the central bank is all about?

It is important to note that in his order dated November 2, Information Commissioner M. Sridhar Acharyulu has come down heavily on the RBI and its chief for failing to uphold the interest of the public at large and not fulfilling its statutory duty to the depositors, the economy and the banking sector, by privileging individual banks’ interests over its obligation to ensure transparency.

While the central bank has repeatedly acknowledged the gravity of the problem it faces, including in ensuring more accountability from the more numerous public sector banks over which it wants greater control, it has consistently invoked both the risk to the country’s “economic interest” and its “fiduciary” relationship with lenders to avoid sharing information on the largest defaulters with RTI applicants.

A few more assertions made by the CIC:

The CIC order is also unsparing of the government for not being more forthcoming. Acharyulu has also asked the Finance Ministry why it should not explain to the people the action taken, or contemplated, to recover dues from wilful defaulters, who owe banks more than Rs. 50 crore, and, where warranted, the criminal proceedings initiated.

Experts assert that while it is no one’s argument that all large unpaid loans are by-products of mala fide borrowing, the onus is on the RBI and the government to make as clean a breast of it as is legally possible, in order to retain public trust.

The RBI has initiated steps to set up a digital Public Credit Registry that would include details of all borrowers including wilful defaulters.

Editorial Analysis:

As the RBI’s autonomy is debated; experts believe that it needs to revisit its exclusive focus on inflation-targeting.

Recently, we observe that the RBI suggests that its independence is being violated while the government rationalises its intervention in terms of its concern for the economy. However, how does one make sense of these positions?

Understanding the idea of Autonomy:

Experts point out that even at the time when the idea of central bank independence began to germinate some two decades ago, this was understood to mean a ‘functional’ independence.

‘Functional Independence’ suggests that the bank would be unconstrained by the government in its functioning, which includes both the instruments it uses and how it uses them.

However, its autonomy was not to extend to ‘goal’ independence. Further, what the goals of the central bank should be were to be chosen by the government

without reference to the bank. The main issue here was whether the bank should focus on inflation alone or also on the level

of employment. Within a decade of this debate, it had been conceded that the focus would be exclusively on the former, and monetary policy came to be identified with ‘inflation targeting’.

Having said this, there are two important narratives that emerge. 1. Firstly, the discourse was solely among interlocutors from Western democracies, ensuring the

issues were those related to their economies. 2. Secondly, even as the major central banks of the world shifted to inflation targeting, in yet

another example of American exceptionalism, the U.S. did not revise the goals of the Federal Reserve.

Further, it was to continue focus on maximising employment while keeping prices stable, a sensible recognition of a possible trade-off between these goals.

However, in India where for close to a quarter century political parties of all hues appear to suggest ‘what is good for America is the best for India’, this has been missed. In 2015 the RBI was by law, in line with a “modern monetary policy”, expected to target inflation. It was to remain the banking regulator though.

A Reflection on the Current Issues of Contention:

The issues of contention happen to be the following: 1. the corrective action to be taken for stressed banks, 2. the prudential norms to be adopted by financial institutions, 3. the easing of liquidity and 4. the sharing of the surplus generated by the RBI. It is important to note that, with the exception of the last, all others are in the RBI’s sphere of operations.

However, on the other hand, on the sharing of the surplus, it is understood that the Government of India, legally is the owner of the surplus generated by the country’s public institutions.

Experts have pointed out that even under this architecture, though, all care must be taken to ensure that the central bank’s reserves are of a level commensurate with the extent of the

financial sector and the potential degree of systemic risk from its malfunctioning, which can vary.

Experts have also pointed out that apart from the issue of sharing the surplus, the RBI should be left alone by the government to decide on the right course of action. This derives not so much from a notion of central bank independence as it does from the point of view of a credible governance policy.

The RBI is the banking regulator after all, and for the government to attempt to direct it would constitute micro-management.

The Issue of Stability of the Economy:

Further, there is reason to believe that some of the actions being sought to be imposed on the RBI today could jeopardise the stability of the economy.

It is important to note that while acting as the lender of last resort can be stabilising, under no circumstances would it be advisable to lower prudential norms in the presence of stressed banks.

Also, the government’s concern for the health of the medium and small enterprises is well-founded. After all, the medium and small enterprises were among the most affected sections following the demonetisation of 2016.

If, in the spirit of contriteness as it were, the government wants to reach out to them, the right course would be to provide interest rate subvention, rather than to force the RBI to tweak its lending norms. There is a severe lack of judgment in loan melas promising online sanction in less than an hour. There is the suggestion in this of the political business cycle, a government trying to nudge the economy prior to an election. The resistance of the RBI top brass to this desperate action is understandable.

Whatever may be the misfeasance of the government in its recent dealings with the RBI, however, it would yet be acceptable to review its own performance in the sphere in which it has an untrammelled independence, namely monetary policy. Under this arrangement it has control over the interest rate.

Over 2013-2018 there has been a 5 percentage point swing in the real interest rate in India, moving from a negative to a positive level, making it among the highest in the world, much higher than that of China.

This is clearly the consequence of an exclusive policy focus on inflation from even before inflation targeting was formally adopted by Parliament in India.

It may well have contributed to slow industrial and export growth, due to a real appreciation of the rupee, and a rise in NPAs even after their existence had been recognised. If this is the monetary policy that central bank independence brings with it, we might just be a little sceptical of the value of the independence itself.

Enabling the objective of job creation:

There is certain populism inherent in privileging inflation control to justify extraordinarily high interest rates.

It is important to note that the absence of inflation by itself only benefits those in employment, it does not assure jobs to the unemployed.

Thus a monetary policy that ignores the impact of its actions on unemployment is not credible.

Interestingly, the government and the RBI have always been on the same page as far as inflation targeting is concerned. The populist message that inflation erodes the income of the poor,

conceals the possibility that in the implementation, such a policy could hold back job creation by restricting investment.

Concluding Remarks:

In conclusion, the rising current account deficit, the slow growth of employment and the disappointing performance of manufacturing, the sector most closely affected by high interest rates, should prompt us to review how monetary policy is conducted in India.

Further, experts believe that the latest tussle between the executive and the central bank will eventually end, in all probability with a compromise.

However, its purpose would have been served if the debate leads to greater awareness on both sides of the other’s compulsions.

However, what if the Government and the RBI do have fundamental disagreements, as they seem to be having now, and are unable to arrive at a common ground?

It is important to note that the option of Section 7 is certainly available to the more powerful side; but Section 7 is a deterrent never to be used.

In conclusion, it is to avoid situations such as the one we are seeing now that former RBI Governor Raghuram Rajan argued for a clear enunciation of the RBI’s responsibilities.

In his book, “I Do What I Do”, former RBI Governor Raghuram Rajan points out that the position of the RBI Governor in the government hierarchy is not defined.

Lastly, the Governor has to be conscious of the limits to his autonomy at all times, and the government has to consider the advice coming from Mint Street in all seriousness, as indeed Dr. Reddy and Dr. Subbarao have also pointed out.

3. Constitutional Crisis in Sri Lanka

A Brief Note on India- Sri Lanka Bilateral Relations: The relationship between India and Sri Lanka is more than 2,500 years old. Both countries have a

legacy of intellectual, cultural, religious and linguistic interaction. In recent years, the relationship has been marked by close contacts at all levels.

Trade and investment have grown and there is cooperation in the fields of development, education, culture and defence.

Both countries share a broad understanding on major issues of international interest. In recent years, significant progress in implementation of developmental assistance projects for

Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) and disadvantaged sections of the population in Sri Lanka has helped further cement the bonds of friendship between the two countries.

Political Relations: President Maithripala Sirisena was elected as the new President of Sri Lanka in the presidential

election held on 8 January, 2015. He succeeded former President Mahinda Rajapaksa. Following parliamentary elections on 17

August 2015, Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe was reappointed as the Prime Minister by President Sirisena on 21 August 2015.

Commercial Relations: Sri Lanka has long been a priority destination for direct investment from India. Sri Lanka is one of

India’s largest trading partner in SAARC. India in turn is Sri Lanka’s largest trade partner globally.

India is among the top four investors in Sri Lanka with cumulative investments of over US$ 1

billion since 2003. The investments are in diverse areas including petroleum retail, IT, financial services, real estate, telecommunication, hospitality & tourism, banking and food processing (tea & fruit juices), metal industries, tires, cement, glass manufacturing, and infrastructure development (railway, power, water supply).

Developmental Cooperation: The conclusion of the armed conflict saw the emergence of a major humanitarian challenge,

with nearly 300,000 Tamil civilians housed in camps for Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs). The Government of India put in place a robust programme of assistance to help the IDPs return to normal life as quickly as possible.

India also continues to assist a large number of smaller development projects in areas like education, health, transport connectivity, small and medium enterprise development and training in many parts of the country through its grant funding.

During the devastation of floods in the end of May 2017, India has responded immediately by sending three ships with relief materials including food supplies, water, inflatable boats, diving team and medical teams for flood relief efforts.

Cultural Relations: The Cultural Cooperation Agreement signed by the Government of India and the Government of

Sri Lanka on 29 November, 1977 at New Delhi forms the basis for periodic Cultural Exchange Programmes between the two countries.

India and Sri Lanka commemorated the 2600th year of the attainment of enlightenment by Lord Buddha (Sambuddhatva Jayanthi) through joint activities. These included the exposition of Sacred Kapilavastu Relics in Sri Lanka that took place in August – September 2012. During the exposition, approximately three million Sri Lankans (nearly 15 percent of the total population of Sri Lanka) paid homage to the Sacred Relics.

The India-Sri Lanka Foundation, set up in December 1998 as an intergovernmental initiative, also aims towards enhancement of scientific, technical, educational and cultural cooperation through civil society exchanges and enhancing contact between the younger generations of the two countries. Education is an important area of cooperation. India now offers about 290 scholarship slots annually to Sri Lankan students. In addition, under the Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation Scheme and the Colombo Plan, India offers 370 slots annually to Sri Lankan nationals.

Fishermen issue: Given the proximity of the territorial waters of both countries, especially in the Palk Straits and

the Gulf of Mannar, incidents of straying of fishermen are common. Both countries have agreed on certain practical arrangements to deal with the issue of bona

fide fishermen of either side crossing the International Maritime Boundary Line. Through these arrangements, it has been possible to deal with the issue of detention of

fishermen in a humane manner. India and Sri Lanka have agreed to set up a Joint Working Group (JWG) on Fisheries between the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare of India and Ministry of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Development of Sri Lanka as the mechanism to help find a permanent solution to the fishermen issue and first meeting took place in December 2016 in New Delhi and second meeting in Colombo on April 07, 2017.

Minister of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare Shri Radha Mohan Singh visited Colombo on 2 January 2017 to participate in the Ministerial Meeting on Fishermen issue. The second meeting of the JWG was held during April 2017 in Colombo. The next round of Ministerial-level talks and JWG meetings were held during October 2017 at New Delhi.

Indian Community: The People of Indian Origin (PIOs) comprise Sindhis, Borahs, Gujaratis, Memons, Parsis,

Malayalis and Telugu speaking persons who have settled down in Sri Lanka (most of them after partition) and are engaged in various business ventures.

Though their numbers (10,000 approximately) are much lesser as compared to Indian Origin Tamils (IOTs), they are economically prosperous and are well placed.

Each of these communities has their organization which organizes festivals and cultural events. According to unofficial statistics, it is estimated that around 14,000 Indian expatriates are living

in Sri Lanka. The IOTs are mostly employed in either tea or rubber plantations in Central, Uva and

Sabragamuwa Provinces though during the last decade, the younger generation has been migrating to Colombo in search of employment.

A fair number of IOTs living in Colombo are engaged in business. According to Government census figures (2011), the population of IOTs is about 1.6 million.

The Constitutional Crisis:

Recently, Sri Lanka’s President Maithripala Sirisena sacked Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and appointed Mahinda Rajapaksa, his political rival until the day before, as the new Prime Minister.

Experts believe that this is a surprising move which Mr. Sirisena made in order to resolve a deepening political dispute between himself and Mr. Wickremesinghe.

However, this act has only pushed Sri Lanka into an unprecedented constitutional crisis, beginning a potentially dangerous phase of an on-going three-cornered power struggle among three leaders.

At the centre of the crisis is the lack of clarity as the new Prime Minister seems to have been appointed without a constitutionally valid vacancy for the position.

A Closer Look:

The crux of the constitutional dispute:

It is important to note that the constitutional provision that Mr. Sirisena has cited in the official letter to Mr. Wickremesinghe does not grant the President authority to remove a Prime Minister from office.

Section 42(4) of the Constitution merely enables the President to appoint a PM.

The President has taken the position that since he is the appointing authority, he also has the implicit power to sack the PM.

It is important to note that the PM is not a public servant who can be sacked by the appointing authority at his will. It is a constitutional office with protection from the executive. This is the crux of the constitutional dispute.

Experts point out that the entire operation of altering the composition of the government seems to have been executed in a great hurry and in secrecy.

Further, there is also a lack of clarity as to whether Mr. Sirisena’s letter (removing Mr. Wickremesinghe) had actually reached him by the time Mr. Rajapaksa was sworn in. This has led some commentators to call it a ‘constitutional coup’.

Position Adopted by Mr. Wickremesinghe:

The position by Mr. Wickremesinghe aggravates the seriousness of this constitutional dispute. Dismissing the constitutional validity of the presidential action, Mr. Wickremesinghe has argued that he still commands a majority in Parliament.

His line of argument is that only Parliament has the constitutionally sanctioned authority to decide whether he could continue in office as PM or not.

It also suggests that as long as there is no no-confidence motion passed in Parliament against him and the cabinet, his position as PM cannot be invalidated by the President at his will.

Mr. Wickremesinghe has also cited the fact of having defeated a no-trust motion brought against him a few months ago, and that situation, of Parliament’s majority expressing faith in him, remaining unaltered.

19th Amendment to Sri Lanka’s Constitution: It is important to note that the 19th Amendment to Sri Lanka’s Constitution, passed in 2015

under the joint political leadership of both Mr. Sirisena and Mr. Wickremesinghe. It curtailed powers of the President under the 1978 Constitution (the original) as well as the

18th Amendment passed in 2010. Among the presidential powers taken away by the 19th Amendment, which is valid, is the one pertaining to the President’s powers over the PM.

The 19th Amendment, which created a dual executive, made the PM’s position secure from the arbitrary actions of the President. Thus, the office of the PM falls vacant only under limited circumstances.

These circumstances include: 1. Death, 2. voluntary resignation, 3. loss of support in Parliament, 4. rejection by Parliament of the budget, and 5. ceasing to be an MP are these circumstances. Sacking by the President is certainly not in this

list.

By this change, the 19th Amendment has also restored the Westminster framework of relationship between the head of state, the PM, and Parliament.

All these make the constitutionality as well as democratic legitimacy of the actions of Mr. Sirisena less than clear.

An argument put forward on behalf of the President is that when the United People’s Freedom Alliance, which was a partner in the so-called unity government, informed the Speaker that it was leaving the ruling coalition, the cabinet automatically stood dissolved, thereby creating a vacancy for the office of the PM.

However, this is not an argument derived from any explicit provision of the Constitution. It is merely a political argument. What it does is no more than confirm that the composition of the coalition government was altered. It does not automatically lead to the loss of constitutional validity of the cabinet and the position of the person holding the office of the PM.

Areas which need clarity:

In Mr. Sirisena’s address to the nation, he did not clarify the constitutional issue at hand.

He cited political and personal reasons as to why he could not partner with Mr. Wickremesinghe as the PM.

However, his assertion that he acted fully in accordance with the Constitution is only a claim. It awaits clarification.

What is in dispute is not the total breakdown of relationship between the two leaders, leading to a collapse of their coalition. What is in doubt is the constitutionality of a series of actions by Mr. Sirisena.

Further, if the series of actions by Mr. Sirisena are valid at all, they set a bad precedence for future constitutional governance in Sri Lanka. It is believed that contrary to the letter and spirit of the 19th Amendment, no PM will be secure in his/her position against arbitrary dismissal by the President. These circumstances also warrant judicial intervention to resolve the constitutional doubt.

A Look at the Current Situation:

Currently, Mr. Wickremesinghe has refused the leave the office of PM as well as the official residence in Colombo.

Speaker Karu Jayasuriya has written to Mr. Sirisena demanding that the rights and privileges of Mr. Wickremesinghe be protected, “until any other person emerged from within Parliament as having secured the confidence of Parliament”.

The Speaker has implicitly acknowledged that Mr. Wickremesinghe is still the constitutionally legitimate PM.

The Parliament was prorogued by the President till November 16 and snap elections were called for Jan, 2019.

The MPs approached the Supreme Court, which has overruled the President’s decision to suspend and dissolve the Parliament and has reversed the order on fresh elections. But the SC cannot reappoint Wickremesinghe, because that is the mandate of the Parliament.

The Parliament reconvened immediately and passed a vote of no confidence against the newly appointed PM – Rajapaksa.

However, Rajapaksa has refused to demit office and has even formed a Cabinet which continues to take crucial policy decisions.

Recently, the court of appeal has issued a Quo-Warranto writ and questioned Rajapaksa ‘on whose authority’ does he continue to occupy the PM’s office. This restrains him and his cabinet from functioning further.

The crisis continues to develop further as the stand-off has not been resolved yet. Editorial Analysis:

Recently, President Maithripala Sirisena dissolved the Sri Lankan Parliament and called a snap general election for January 5, 2019.

The announcement came within hours of his party spokesman publicly admitting to lacking a majority in Parliament. Mr. Sirisena’s front was aiming for a majority to push its controversially installed Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa through the legislature.

Resisting Mr. Sirisena’s move, Mr. Wickremesinghe maintained that he was the legitimate

Prime Minister and challenged Mr. Rajapaksa to a vote in Parliament to test their claims to majority.

Mr. Sirisena had earlier suspended Parliament until November 16, 2018 possibly to muster strength for his front, but summoned the House for November 14, 2018 amid growing pressure.

Experts point out that both decisions of Mr. Sirisena, i.e. a) sacking Mr. Wickremesinghe and b) Dissolving Parliament, have raised serious questions about constitutional validity.

As for the dismissal of Mr. Wickremesinghe, the 19th Amendment removed the President’s authority to arbitrarily sack his Prime Minister.

It is important to note that under the Constitution, the Prime Minister’s office does not fall vacant unless in circumstances of his death, voluntary resignation or loss of majority in a crucial vote in Parliament.

Further, since none of these is true in the current situation, a new appointment by the President is constitutionally ruled out.

Concluding Remarks:

In conclusion, experts believe that the political flux over the one month was the culmination

of a bitter power struggle between Mr. Sirisena and Mr. Wickremesinghe within the ruling coalition.

The two leaders, from traditionally rival parties and with incompatible ideologies, had joined hands to form the government in 2015, ousting Mr. Rajapaksa.

Further, in about three-and-a-half years, they fell apart. Amid the pressure of a Rajapaksa comeback, Mr. Sirisena chose to side with him.

It is important to note that the conduct of elections will depend on the Election Commission’s position on the development and possible legal hurdles, since Mr. Wickremesinghe’s United National Party (UNP) has vowed to move the Supreme Court on the “illegal” dissolution of Parliament.

Also, from the time the 19th Amendment capped the Presidency at two terms, Mr. Rajapaksa has been eager to return as Prime Minister.

But he is now with Mr. Sirisena, who brings with him at least part of his unpopular coalition government’s incumbency. Mr. Wickremesinghe, on the other hand, is faced with a dual challenge. These challenges are as follows:

1. some within his party have been demanding a new leader for some time, 2. while those backing him are aware of his falling political stock amid a growing economic crisis.

Some experts also suggest that Mr. Wickremesinghe should realise that he is partly to blame for

the political imbroglio. His inability to establish a stable working relationship with the President to run the coalition

government, casual disregard for the popular mandate he and Mr. Sirisena jointly won in 2015 for corruption-free governance and politics, lackadaisical attitude to constitutional reform and reconciliation, and gross neglect of popular demands for better economic governance have severely eroded his popular standing.

The biggest political irony is this. The collective failure of Mr. Sirisena and Mr. Wickremesinghe to be faithful to the 2015 mandate has now brought Mr. Rajapaksa back to power on the invitation of one party in a coalition which dislodged him from power.

4. ISRO’s recent launches: GSAT-29, HySIS, GSAT-11

ISRO has successfully launched communication satellite GSAT-29 on its heavy-lift vehicle, the GSLV-Mk-III. The spacecraft as well as the vehicle are important to the space agency and its road map.

Weather watch is a routine pre-launch activity for space agencies and especially so for ISRO around this time of the year.

Mission managers were keeping an eye on the cyclonic build-up on the east coast in Andhra Pradesh, where the launch centre is located.

ISRO also succeeded in a PSLV mission on November 26 to launch HySIS, a new variant of Earth observation satellites, along with 20-30 small commercial satellites.

The third and ISRO’s heaviest to date, GSAT-11, launched on December 5th on a European space vehicle, Ariane-5, from Kourou, French Guiana.

Key Points: One significance of the GSAT-29 mission is that an Indian spacecraft will be flown after about

seven months: the last one was the IRNSS-1I launched on April 12. For the other, it would be ISRO’s second communication satellite mission of 2018. It had

launched another communication satellite, GSAT-6A, on March 29 but lost it in space a day later. A third factor weighing on Wednesday’s mission: this would be only the second trial or

developmental flight, D2, of the GSLV-Mk-III or Mk-III. The GSAT-29 and GSAT-11 satellites are part of the planned Indian HTS quartet. The HTSs or

high throughput satellites are being sent out to provide a vastly improved and faster Internet connectivity. GSAT-19, the first of the series, was sent up in June 2017 from Sriharikota.

HTSs or high throughput satellites

India is on the cusp of a satellite-driven digital or broadband revolution, similar to DTH or direct-to-home broadcasting of the 2000s, with a plan to deploy five high-throughput communication spacecraft starting this year, according to a space scientist heading the project at Indian Space Research Organisation.

These HTSs have been game-changers in the West, providing Internet connectivity many times faster, smoother, easier and probably cheaper than now. Two of the Gen-5 spacecraft are approved and getting ready; the others are said to be at various stages of consideration.

ISRO will also test new technologies with its HTSs, such as the new flexible ‘bus’ or satellite assembly platform, electric propulsion, Ka band, lithium ion batteries, among others.

HTS reuses satellite ‘beams’ several times over smaller areas. It will drive a next-generation technology revolution. Individuals, planners in government, businesses like banks, ATMs, reservation systems, cellular and private networks and users in remote areas are expected to benefit from improved connectivity.

The West adopted the technology a few years ago. With a large number of users and multiple service providers, the cost of connectivity can become affordable as in the West.

5. Deny MSP to stubble burners: NGT

Context

Stating that State governments had failed to curb stubble burning, the National Green Tribunal (NGT) on Monday summoned the Chief Secretaries of Delhi, Punjab, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh.

“We do not see any difficulty why such economic incentives and disincentives should not be duly planned or executed. We make it clear that the existing Minimum Support Price (MSP) Scheme must be so interpreted as to enable the States concerned to wholly or partly deny the benefit of MSP to those who continue to burn the crop residue” the Bench said.

What is Stubble burning?

Stubble burning refers to the use of a controlled fire to clear the crop residue that remains in the paddock after harvest and could more accurately be called ‘crop residue burning.

It is mainly carried out in Haryana and Punjab. Open burning of husk produces harmful smoke that causes pollution. Open burning of husk is

of incomplete combustion in nature. Hence large amount of toxic pollutants are emitted in the atmosphere. Pollutants contain harmful gases like Methane, Carbon Monoxide (CO), Volatile organic compound (VOC) and carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.

What is Combine harvesting?

Combines are machines that harvest, thresh i.e separate the grain, and also clean the separated grain, all at once.

The problem, however, is that the machine doesn’t cut close enough to the ground, leaving stubble behind that the farmer has no use for.

There is pressure on the farmer to sow the next crop in time for it to achieve a full yield. The quickest and cheapest solution, therefore, is to clear the field by burning the stubble.

Why do Farmers Burn?

Cost Factor: The straw management equipment is costly and process is time consuming. Also, the cost of stubble management is not taken into account while determining the minimum support price (MSP).

Increasing mechanization of agriculture: Stubble problem was not as severe when paddy was harvested manually because the farmers use to cut it as close to the ground as possible. Due to mechanization the crop residue that remains in the field is of larger quantity. Labour costs are very high now

Those who want fodder have to get the stubble removed manually or use specialised machines to do the job. But that is costly.

Time Factor: Delay in sowing means yield decline, this leaves very little time to clear the farm for sowing.

Unlike wheat stalks that are used as animal fodder, the paddy straw has high silica content that animals can’t digest.

Since farmers need to sow wheat within a fortnight of harvesting paddy, they burn the straw to save time, labour and money.

National Green Tribunal

The National Green Tribunal has been established in 2010 under the National Green Tribunal Act 2010.

It draws inspiration from India’s constitutional provision of Article 21, which assures the citizens of India the right to a healthy environment.

It aims for effective and expeditious disposal of cases relating to environmental protection and conservation of forests and other natural resources including enforcement of any legal right relating to the environment and giving relief and compensation for damages to persons and property and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

It has Original Jurisdiction on matters of “substantial question relating to environment” and & “damage to the environment due to specific activity” (such as pollution).

Principles of Justice adopted by NGT

The NGT is not bound by the procedure laid down under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, but shall be guided by principles of natural justice.

NGT is also not bound by the rules of evidence as enshrined in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Thus, it will be relatively easier for conservation groups to present facts and issues before the NGT, including pointing out technical flaws in a project, or proposing alternatives that could minimize environmental damage but which have not been considered.

While passing Orders/decisions/awards, the NGT will apply the principles of sustainable development, the precautionary principle and the polluter pays principles.

6. Left Wing Extremism in India

Larger Background:

Naxalism was once called by the government as the biggest internal security threat faced by the country.

Dynamics of Maoist Insurgency:

Some sections of the society, especially the younger generation, have romantic illusions about the Maoists, arising out of an incomplete understanding of their ideology. However, the central theme of Maoist ideology is violence.

The Maoist insurgency doctrine glorifies violence as the primary means to overwhelm the existing socio-economic and political structures.

The Peoples Liberation Guerilla Army (PLGA), the armed wing of CPI (Maoist), has been created with this purpose in mind.

In the first stage of the insurgency, the PLGA resorts to guerrilla warfare, which primarily aims at creating a vacuum at the grass-roots level of the existing governance structures. This is achieved by killing lower-level government officials, police-personnel of the local police stations, the workers of mainstream political parties and the peoples representatives of the Panchayati Raj system. After creating a political and governance vacuum, they coerce the local population to join the movement. A strident propaganda is also carried out against the purported and real inadequacies of the existing state structure.

In areas under Maoist domination, the absence of governance becomes a self- fulfilling prophecy since the delivery systems are extinguished through killings and intimidation. This is the first step in the strategy of the Maoists to seek to control the countryside. In the meanwhile, many Front Organisations are created to facilitate mass-mobilisation in semi-urban and urban areas through ostensibly democratic means. Most of the Front Organisations are led by well-educated intellectuals with firm belief in the Maoist insurgency doctrine. These ideologues function as masks to cover the violent nature of the CPI (Maoist) ideology. They also form propaganda/disinformation machinery of the party.

They stridently take up issues like ‘displacement of tribals’, ‘corporate exploitation’, ‘human rights violations’ by security forces etc. and often make fantastic claims in this regard which get reported even by the mainstream media.

The Front Organisations also skilfully use state structures and legal processes to further the Maoist agenda and weaken the enforcement regime.

The important functions of these Organisations include recruitment of ‘professional

revolutionaries’, raising funds for the insurgency, creating urban shelters for underground cadres, providing legal assistance to arrested cadres and mass- mobilisation by agitating over issues of relevance/ convenience.

The Front Organisations aim to provide short-term democratic subterfuge to cover-up the totalitarian and oppressive nature of the Maoist ideology. The CPI (Maoist) also have a strategic game-plan to create a ‘United Front’ with all like-minded insurgent/terrorist outfits in India. It needs to be remembered that many of these outfits are supported by external forces inimical to India and the CPI (Maoist) consider such alliances as strategic assets.

In a nutshell, the CPI (Maoist), the main LWE outfit in India, aims to overthrow the existing democratic state structure with violence as their primary weapon, and mass mobilization and strategic united fronts as complementary components and plans to usher in so-called ‘New Democratic Revolution’ in India.

Approach taken by the Government of India:

The Government’s approach is to deal with Left Wing Extremism in a holistic manner, in the areas of security, development, ensuring rights and entitlements of local communities, improvement in governance and public perception management.

In dealing with this decades-old problem, it has been felt appropriate, after various high-level deliberations and interactions with the State Governments concerned, that an integrated approach aimed at the relatively more affected areas would deliver results.

With this in view, a detailed analysis of the spread and trends in respect of Left Wing Extremist violence has been made and 90 districts in eleven States have been taken up for special attention with regard to planning, implementation and monitoring various interventions.

However, ‘Police’ and ‘Public Order’ being State subjects, action on maintenance of law and order lies primarily in the domain of the State Governments.

The Central Government closely monitors the situation and supplements and coordinates their efforts in several ways. These include providing Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs); sanction of India Reserve (IR) battalions, setting up of Counter Insurgency and Anti Terrorism (CIAT) schools; modernisation and upgradation of the State Police and their Intelligence apparatus; reimbursement of security-related expenditure under the Security Related Expenditure (SRE) Scheme; providing helicopters for anti-LWE operations, assistance in training of State Police through the Ministry of Defence, the Central Police Organisations and the Bureau of Police Research and Development; sharing of Intelligence; facilitating inter-State coordination; assistance in community policing and civic action programmes etc.

The underlying philosophy is to enhance the capacity of the State Governments to tackle the Maoist menace in a concerted manner.

In essence, it is the belief of the Government of India that through a holistic approach focussing on development and security-related interventions, the LWE problem can be successfully tackled.

However, it is clear that the Left Wing Extremists do not want root causes like underdevelopment to be addressed in a meaningful manner since they resort to targeting school buildings, roads, railways, bridges, health infrastructure, communication facilities etc in a major way.

They wish to keep the population in their areas of influence marginalized to perpetuate their outdated ideology. Consequently, the process of development has been set back by decades in many parts of the country under Left Wing Extremists influence.

This needs to be recognised by the civil society and the media to build pressure on the Left Wing Extremists to eschew violence, join the mainstream and recognise the fact that the socio-

economic and political dynamics and aspirations of 21st Century India are far removed from the Maoist world-view.

Further, an ideology based on violence and annihilation is doomed to fail in a democracy which offers legitimate forums of grievance redressal.

Some Recent Initiatives:

The Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has been implementing the ‘National Policy and Action Plan’ since 2015 to combat Left Wing Extremism (LWE). This envisages a multi-pronged strategy involving security and development related measures.

The significant features of the new policy were zero tolerance towards violence coupled with a big push to developmental activities so that benefits of development reached the poor and vulnerable in the affected areas.

According to the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), Maoist influence has been gradually shrinking. In figures released in April, 2018, the MHA, which recently redrew the red corridor, brought down the number of districts affected with Naxal violence from 106 to 90, spread across 11 states.

The Government has adopted a multi-pronged strategy. This primarily includes development and security aspects of affected districts. Projects related to development include infrastructure, roads, cellphone connectivity, bridges and schools.

As per MHA data, 2,329 mobile towers were installed in Maoist-affected areas in the first phase of the project aimed at improving cellphone connectivity, with the maximum number of towers being installed in Jharkhand (816), followed by Chhattisgarh (519). In the second phase, the government plans to install another 4,072 mobile towers.

Security Related Expenditure (SRE) Scheme: This Scheme has been extended by the Government on 27.09.2017 as a sub scheme of the

Umbrella Scheme Modernization of Police Forces for a period of 03 years till 2020. Under the Security Related Expenditure (SRE) Scheme, the central Govt. reimburses to the

State Governments of 11 LWE affected States Security Related Expenditure of 90 districts relating to training and operational needs of security forces, ex-gratia payment to the family of civilians/security forces killed in LWE violence, compensation to Left Wing Extremist cadres who surrendered in accordance with the surrender and rehabilitation policy of the concerned State Government, community policing, Security related infrastructure for village defence committees and publicity materials.

There is a substantial increase in annual outlay and new items such as compensation for Security force personnel incapacitated during anti LWE operations and compensation for the property damage have been included for the first time in this scheme. The SRE Schemes aim at strengthening of the capacity of the LWE affected States to fight the LWE problem.

What is meant by the red corridor region?

The red corridor region is demarcated by the union government to notify the districts which are affected by Left Wing Extremism (LWE).

It is spanning across 106 districts in 10 States, namely Bihar, Jharkhand, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Telangana, West Bengal, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and Chhattisgarh

In more specific terms, a recent report of MoHA classifies the red corridor region with respect to the severity of the Naxal influence.

The three main categories are –

1. Severely affected – Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Odisha and Bihar 2. Partially affected – West Bengal, Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh 3. Slightly affected – Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh A total of 44 districts have been removed from the list and eight new districts which could be

slightly or partially affected has been added to the list.

A Brief look at actions taken by government to counter Left Wing Extremism (LWE)?

The National Policy & Action Plan constituted by the MHA had been introduced to reduce the concentration of Naxal affected districts.

All expenses incurred by the affected areas were covered under the Security Related Expenditure (SRE) Scheme.

This provides funds for projects related to development such as infrastructure, transportation, communication, bridges and schools.

Under which mobile towers, boarding schools and roads were installed in LWE affected areas. Government also aims for a multi-pronged strategy which primarily includes development and

security aspects of affected districts.

Editorial Analysis:

Recently, there has been an increase in attacks by Maoists, indicating that their ability to strike remains strong.

Last week, for example, in two attacks in Chhattisgarh, five persons were killed in a blast in Dantewada district, and one BSF sub-inspector was killed in Kanker district.

Some experts believe that, the government’s strategy of using military force while earmarking funds for infrastructure and welfare programmes in the districts most affected by left-wing extremism has weakened the Maoists.

It is important to note that Paramilitary and police actions have resulted in the death of senior leaders, including Cherukuri Rajkumar (‘Azad’) and Mallojula Koteswara Rao (‘Kishenji’).

Further, welfare measures, even if they have been implemented haphazardly, have enabled outreach into tribal areas where the state was hitherto absent.

It is these actions that have forced the Maoists to retreat further into the forest areas of central and south-central India to use them as bases to launch attacks, seeking to invite state repression on tribal people and to get recruits.

It is also important to note that the change of guard in the CPI (Maoist) leadership also suggests that it has moved towards further militarisation to secure its guerrilla forces’ influence. General secretary Nambala Kesava Rao (‘Basavraj’), who has replaced Muppala Lakshmana Rao (‘Ganapathy’), is alleged to have led attacks on security forces and killings.

Concluding Remarks:

The CPI (Maoist) has sought to project itself as a revolutionary political movement led by peasants and tribals, seeking to rebuild after the failures of the earlier Naxalite movement.

After the merger of the People’s War Group and the Maoist Communist Centre of India into the CPI (Maoist) in 2004, the outlawed party managed to consolidate its presence across a “Red Corridor” spanning central and north-central India, marked by rural deprivation.

Further, rather than focussing on socio-economic struggles to uplift peasants and tribals in this region, the Maoists relied on waging a military battle against the state with the intention of capturing power through violent means.

Experts believe that this was largely due to a gross and mindless misreading of the nature of the Indian state and its democratic institutions.

These actions have resulted in the militarisation of these areas, repression of tribal people both by state actions such as the creation of the Salwa Judum — disbanded by judicial order — and Maoist authoritarianism.

Lastly, it is believed that the change in leadership of the CPI (Maoist) and its recent actions suggest there is no end in sight to this insurgency in the near term.

What is “Salwa Judum”? Salwa Judum refers to “Peace March” in Gondi language. This was a militia mobilised and deployed as part of anti-insurgency operations in

Chhattisgarh, India, aimed at countering Naxalite violence in the region. The militia, consisting of local tribal youth, received support and training from the

Chhattisgarh state government. The State Government justified it by saying that it alone can’t fight the Naxals and needed social

support from the same region and communities. It was abolished by the SC in the Nandini Sundar case as a unconstitutional force, where the

state was sponsoring a private militia to counter Naxals and Salwa Judum was accused for severe human right violations.

7. The Quad and the Indo-Pacific:

Larger Background:

A Note on the Indo-Pacific Region: The Indo-Pacific region is a geostrategic and geo-economic concept that has been gaining

significance in the realm of geopolitics for some time now. Geographically, it refers to the area which covers the Eastern Coast of Africa through Indian

Ocean and Western Pacific Ocean. The Indo-Pacific region is at the heart of India’s engagement with the world. India’s engagement

with the region, encompasses many of the world’s most dynamic economies. The very concept of the “Indo-Pacific” was popularized by Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe

during his 2007 “Confluence of the Two Seas” speech to the Indian Parliament. As a matter of fact, the Japanese PM’s speech went further, urging the United States, Australia,

Japan, and India to venture into a quadrilateral security dialogue. This group has been informally termed as “the Quad”.

In recent times, while delivering the keynote address at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, Prime Minister Modi also placed this region at the heart of India’s engagement with the world. As a matter of fact, the use of term “Indo-Pacific”, as opposed to the term “Asia Pacific” previously, by the Trump administration, acknowledges a certain historical reality and a current day reality- that South Asia and in particular, India plays a key role in the Pacific, in East Asia and Southeast Asia.

The government of India has over the past few years, renewed India’s Look East Policy (LEP) into an ‘Act East Policy’, this change in outlook seeks to increase the people-to-people contact and connectivity in the region, and at the same time, seeks to play a larger and active role in this vital region.

Geostrategic Significance

The region represents the centre of gravity of the world’s economic, political and strategic interests. Being rich in natural resources, especially hydrocarbons, there is a natural competition for resources by the littorals of this region. Further, the region consists of many of the world’s vital choke points for global commerce, including the Straits of Malacca which is very critical for the growth of world economy. It is noteworthy that the geographical extent of the Indo-Pacific has never been clearly defined collectively by regional powers, and remains open to interpretation. Broadly, the term “Indo-Pacific”, refers to all countries bordering the Indian and Pacific oceans.

It is important to note the driving factors that has led to focus shifting towards the Indo-Pacific region. One of the main reasons have been the aggressive policies adopted by China, which over the last few years, have invited criticism from many littoral nations of the Indo-Pacific, an example being building artificial islands in the South China Sea. Over and above this, China has established its first overseas military base in Djibouti.

China is planning to open a new naval base next to Pakistan’s China-controlled Gwadar port. Further, China has leased several islands in the crisis-plagued Maldives, where it is set to build a marine observatory that will provide subsurface data supporting the deployment of nuclear-powered attack submarines (SSNs) and nuclear-powered ballistic missile subs (SSBNs) in the Indian Ocean.

A Brief Note on the Initiatives taken by Government of India: There have been visits made by important officials from India to the East African and West

Asian littorals- for example, President Ram Nath Kovind’s visit to Mauritius and Madagascar last month. Such initiatives can also be looked upon as India’s response to China’s challenge.

The President of India committed a $100 million line of credit for defence procurement by Mauritius. India is developing a new airstrip, along with jetty facilities on the islands of Agalega, perhaps for future use by the Indian Navy.

With reference to Madagascar, the President promised greater cooperation in the “blue economy” domain- this includes, the promotion of sustainable fisheries, maritime connectivity, marine resource management, ecotourism, and pollution control.

For Mozambique, the government of India will be increasing the training of military personnel and upgrade defence equipment and infrastructure, including medical facilities and hydrographic surveying of Mozambique waters.

Further, the presence of ASEAN leaders at the Republic Day celebrations held on 26th Jan, 2018 was a truly significant sign of the increasing ties that India is pursuing particularly in Southeast Asia.

US-India Relations

The Barack Obama administration, gave much emphasis to the ‘Pivot to Asia’ strategy. Currently, under the Trump administration, the phrase ‘free and open Indo-Pacific’ replaces the idea of ‘Pivot to Asia’.

This 21st century partnership must take into account each country’s economic trajectory, political values and strategic posture. The Indo-Pacific will be the region in which this partnership can truly be leveraged to the fullest possible extent. It is important to note that the US has been a principal architect and the traditional guarantor of a liberal economic and maritime order in the Indo-Pacific.

The Malabar exercise, conducted annually, which now formally includes a third partner, Japan, is another key feature of military cooperation, improving coordination and interoperability. Further, adding to these efforts are the Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA), which will create maritime logistic links, and a white shipping agreement which promotes regional maritime domain awareness. The signing of COMCASA agreement during the inaugural 2+2 dialogue between India and the U.S. bears further testimony to the growing closeness between the two countries.

Apart from these convergences, it is suggested that India and the US must also collaborate to promote a market-driven blue economy as a framework for growth and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region, especially keeping in mind that this region is home to abundant supply of hydrocarbons, minerals, and food resources. Further, it has also been suggested that through direct investments in Indian efforts, such as in identified coastal economic zones and India’s Sagarmala initiative, and participation in regional groupings like the Indian Ocean Rim Association, the US can support regional collaboration in the Indo-Pacific region.

As China seeks to increasingly expand its political and military influence in the region under the aegis of the Belt and Road Initiative, it is imperative to formulate a rules-based order for the region. To ensure this takes place, states must work together to forge a more inclusive approach towards an emerging regional architecture. It is in this respect, that the India-US partnership has an important role to play. The American vision of the Indo-Pacific Economic Corridor supplements India’s Act East policy. Further, India-US cooperation in physical and soft infrastructure can a) link cross-border transport corridors b) assist in creating regional energy connections and c) foster greater people-to-people interactions.

Editorial Analysis:

Officials from the ‘Quadrilateral’ grouping of India, Australia, Japan and the U.S. met in

Singapore on 14th November, 2018. Experts believe that their challenge will be to accurately describe their common agenda. It is important to note that the Quad is billed as four democracies with a shared objective

to ensure and support a “free, open and prosperous” Indo-Pacific region. Experts believe that during this round, the four countries are expected to discuss

infrastructure projects they are working on, and building humanitarian disaster response mechanisms.

Further, over the past few months, India and Japan have announced they will combine efforts on a number of projects in South Asia, including bridges and roads in Bangladesh, an LNG facility in Sri Lanka and reconstruction projects in Myanmar’s Rakhine province.

As a matter of fact, Australia has unveiled an ambitious $2 billion project to fund infrastructure and build maritime and military infrastructure in the Pacific region, on which it is willing to cooperate with other Quad members.

The four countries have discussed about regional developments, including elections in the Maldives, the collapse of the government in Sri Lanka and the latest developments in North Korea.

Experts believe that with Quad talks being held on the sidelines of the East Asia summit, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership summit and the ASEAN-India informal summit, discussions will include some of the overlapping issues among these groupings.

Concluding Remarks

Experts believe that despite the potential for cooperation, the Quad remains a mechanism without a defined strategic mission.

It is important to note that in 2007, when the grouping was first formed following cooperation after the 2004 tsunami, the idea was to better coordinate maritime capabilities for disaster situations.

When the idea of this grouping was revived in 2017, the grouping seemed to have become a counter to China’s growing inroads into the region, despite denials that any particular country had been targeted.

Even a common definition of the geographical area encompassed has yet to be found. While Washington sees the U.S. and India as “bookends” of the Indo-Pacific, India and Japan have included the oceans up to Africa in their definition.

Experts point out that the entire focus on the Indo-Pacific makes the Quad a maritime, rather than land-based, grouping, raising questions whether the cooperation extends to the Asia-Pacific and Eurasian regions.

As a matter of fact, even on maritime exercises, there is a lack of concurrence. India has not admitted Australia in the Malabar exercises with the U.S. and Japan, despite requests from Canberra, and has also resisted raising the level of talks from an official to the political level.

Experts believe that the fact that India is the only member not in a treaty alliance with the other Quad countries will slow progress somewhat, although each member is committed to building a stronger Quadrilateral engagement.

Lastly, it it believed that the outcome of the third round in Singapore will be judged by the ability of the group to issue a joint declaration, which eluded it in the first and second rounds.

8. When judges legislate (Judicial Activism or Judicial Overreach)

Context:

There have been many recent judgments, where the Supreme Court has become hyper-activist in making laws. However, having said this, an important question that arises is: can judges legislate?

Editorial Analysis:

A Look at Some Specifics:

Experts point out that this question has already been answered in the past by the court.

o As a matter of fact, in the Ram Jawaya v. The State of Punjab (1955) case, the court observed: “Our Constitution does not contemplate assumption, by one organ or part of the state, of functions that essentially belong to another.”

o This implies that there should be a broad separation of powers in the Constitution of the three organs of the state, and that one organ should not encroach into the domain of another.

o If one organ encroaches into the domain of another, the delicate balance in the Constitution will be upset and there will be chaos.

It is important to note that making laws is the function of the legislature. As observed in Union of India v. Deoki Nandan Aggarwal (1991), “The power to legislate has

not been conferred on the courts.” In Suresh Seth v. Commissioner, Indore Municipal Corporation (2005), the court observed: “Under our Constitutional scheme, Parliament and Legislative Assemblies exercise sovereign power to enact laws.”

Experts ask an important question: Is judicial discipline being observed? The following section will examine some recent decisions of the court: 1. Firstly, in Arun Gopal v. Union of India (2017), the Supreme Court fixed timings for bursting

Diwali fireworks and prohibited the use of non-green fireworks, although there are no laws to that effect.

2. Secondly, in M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (2018), the court annulled the statutory Rule 115(21) of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, when it directed that no BS-4 vehicle should be sold after March 30, 2020, and that only BS-6 vehicles can be sold after that date.

3. Thirdly, in Subhash Kashinath Mahajan v. State of Maharashtra (2018), the court amended the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, by annulling Section 18 which said that no anticipatory bail will be granted to persons accused under the Act; by requiring a preliminary enquiry; and by prohibiting arrest under the Act except with permission in writing by the appropriate authority.

4. Fourthly, in Rajesh Sharma v. The State of Uttar Pradesh (2017), the court felt that Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code was being misused. So it amended that Section by requiring complaints under that provision to be sent to a Family Welfare Committee constituted by the District Legal Services Authority, although there is no such requirement in Section 498A.

5. Lastly, the National Green Tribunal (NGT) ordered that no 15-year-old petrol-driven or 10-year-old diesel-driven vehicle will ply in Delhi, and the Supreme Court has directed impounding such vehicles, though neither the NGT nor the Supreme Court are legislative bodies.

In conclusion, it is important to note that if judges are free to make laws of their choices, not only would that go against the principle of separation of powers, it could also lead to uncertainty in the law and chaos as every judge will start drafting his own laws according to his whims and fancies.

The other side of the argument:

But one needs to understand as to why the Judiciary has ventured into the domain of the legislature and the executive.

It is largely the failure of the executive and the legislature that has pushed the Judiciary to take matters into its hands.

The govt and the legislature have not addressed many pressing issues which required either a policy intervention or legal intervention.

In the absence of such policies and laws, we have been left with a governance vacuum that the Judiciary is trying to fill.

In most cases, Judicial activism and innovations has been done with the right intentions and it definitely has expanded the scope of fundamental rights and enabled better protection of citizen rights,

However it tends to violate a basic structure of the constitution, which is the Doctrine of Separation of Powers.

9. Backlog of cases in the Judiciary

Larger Background:

Articles 124 to 147 in Part V of the Constitution deal with the organization, independence, jurisdiction, powers, procedures and so on of the Supreme Court.

Earlier this year (2018), the then Chief Justice of India, Dipak Misra had written to all High Court Chief Justices’, advising them to setup disposal review mechanisms to clear cases on priority.

He had also recommended that High Courts’ take stock of cases that are filed and disposed every month in lower courts as well.

Currently, our judiciary is struggling under a tremendous workload. According to the National Crime Record Bureau, lakhs of people who are lodged in jail are waiting for their pleas to be heard.

Thousands are in jail for petty crimes and have spent more jail time than are required by law. Reasons for judicial delays: There are a large number of reasons that account for judicial delays. These include but are not restricted to: 1. Large number of unfilled judicial vacancies 2. A long drawn judicial process: This is compounded by the fact that often witnesses are not

willing to come forward. The process concerning criminal cases also takes time; this is exacerbated by the fact that it takes time for reports such as medical reports, forensic reports, etc. to be given. There are at times even strikes in Courts that delay the process.

3. Fast growing population

4. Lack of Infrastructure: Former Chief Justice, Dipak Misra has described that the lack of

infrastructure, as one of the causes. 5. Lack of good quality judges 6. Salaries and Perks of judges: If better salaries and better perks are provided, then better

lawyers would be interested in becoming judges. Today, the quality of lawyers interested in becoming judges is poor, because of which the quality of judges is down and because of which the justice delivery system is also suffering.

7. An increasing number of states and central laws 8. Mounting number of appeals 9. Shortage of judges in courts 10. Delay in hearing of cases of common civil rights in High Courts 11. Increase in Appeals in High Courts against the orders of the quasi-judicial bodies 12. Continuous adjournment 13. Indiscriminate utilisation of writ rights 14. Inadequate system of monitoring cases 15. Difficulties in tracking trials 16. Efforts to prevent a case during hearing 17. Lack of will and capability to decide cases 18. Apart from these, there are delays during pre-trial and trial of cases 19. In the courts, we have a certain number of backlog cases that are listed along with regular

matters that are being heard. Thus, the judge doesn’t have enough time to finish hearing regular matters, and thereafter go onto backlog matters. Thus, hearings keep getting adjourned, or they keep getting pushed back into the system.

Over and above the reasons listed above, there are certain other reasons as well. For example, In the courts, we have a certain number of backlog cases that are listed along with regular matters that are being heard. Thus, the judge doesn’t have enough time to finish hearing regular matters, and thereafter go onto backlog matters. Thus, hearings keep getting adjourned, or they keep getting pushed back into the system. This also ties into the fact that lawyers know that the system works this way, so they don’t necessarily prepare for these backlog cases and come and therefore, they ask for adjournments and adjournments are given quite liberally in many courts as well. Thus, this creates a system where backlog cases continue to exist. A Look at some important Statistics: Apart from corruption, there is a long and costly judicial process and delays in delivering

decisions. As far as pending cases are concerned, the Supreme Court has 60,000 pending cases, waiting to be disposed of 38 lakh cases are in the High Courts, and 2 crore, 30 lakh are in the district and subordinate courts, which are waiting to be considered.

In Delhi, there are so many cases that are pending that even if 5 minutes is given to each lawsuit, it would take 466 years to settle all the cases. According to the National Judicial Data Grid, over 2 crore, 72 lakh cases are pending in Indian courts. Out of these, 83 lakh cases are civil lawsuits, and over 1 crore, 90 lakh are criminal cases.

Some of these have to be addressed by the Government; some of them have to be addressed by the collegium system. Both should work together and ensure that everything is in place. Unfortunately, this kind of a concerted effort is not there. It is because of the lack of that concerted effort, that no substantial progress is being made in the matter of disposal of cases.

Editorial Analysis:

Experts also point out the chronic shortage of judges and severe understaffing of the courts they preside over are significant reasons.

It is important to note that more than a decade after the Supreme Court laid down guidelines in 2007 for making appointments in the lower judiciary within a set time frame, a similar issue is back before the highest court.

The immediate context is the existence of more than 5,000 vacancies in the subordinate courts.

A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi has pulled up State governments and the administration of various High Courts for the delay in filling these vacancies.

As a matter of fact, answers provided in the Rajya Sabha reveal that as on March 31, 2018, nearly a quarter of the total number of posts in the subordinate courts remained vacant.

The court has put the actual figure at 5,133 out 22,036 sanctioned posts. The State-wise figures are quite alarming, with Uttar Pradesh having a vacancy percentage of

42.18 and Bihar 37.23. Among the smaller States, Meghalaya has a vacancy level of 59.79%. Experts point out an important reason: the tardiness in the process of calling for applications,

holding recruitment examinations and declaring the results, and, more significantly, finding the funds to pay and accommodate the newly appointed judges and magistrates. Moreover, Public Service Commissions should recruit the staff to assist these judges, while State governments build courts or identify space for them.

A Closer Look:

o According to the Constitution of India, district judges are appointed by the Governor in

consultation with the High Court. o Other subordinate judicial officers are appointed as per rules framed by the Governor in

consultation with the High Court and the State Public Service Commission. o Thus, in effect, the High Courts have a significant role to play.

A smooth and time-bound process of making appointments would, therefore, require close coordination between the High Courts and the State Public Service Commissions.

As a matter of fact, a study released last year by the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy revealed that the recruitment cycle in most States far exceeded the time limit prescribed by the Supreme Court.

This time limit is 153 days for a two-tier recruitment process and 273 days for a three-tier process. It is important to note that most states took longer to appoint junior civil judges as well as district judges by direct recruitment.

Experts point out that this situation demands a massive infusion of both manpower and resources.

Subordinate courts perform the most critical judicial functions that affect the life of the common man: conducting trials, settling civil disputes, and implementing the bare bones of the law.

Any failure to allocate the required human and financial resources may lead to the crippling of judicial work in the subordinate courts. It will also amount to letting down poor litigants and under trials, who stand to suffer the most due to judicial delay.

Concluding Remarks:

In conclusion, it is hoped that through the infrastructural development of the judiciary, and in particular, the subordinate judiciary, training of judicial officers, training of public prosecutors,

implementing e-courts project for lower judiciary, over and above the reasons highlighted as above would go a long way towards building capacity and reducing the pendency of cases.

It is also hoped that the third pillar of democracy is empowered to move quickly on the pending cases, and a critical determinant of this would be the political will that can be garnered in Parliament over and above the renewed attention which this long-pending issue should receive from various stakeholders- importantly, the media, and the citizenry.

10. Kartarpur Corridor: Hope for India-Pak relations?

Editorial Analysis:

Recently, India and Pakistan laid the foundation stone for operationalizing a visa-free corridor between Dera Baba Nanak in Indian Punjab and Kartarpur Sahib in Pakistan’s Punjab.

This has been a longstanding plea of Sikh pilgrims. For a historical perspective, it is important to note that this demand had gathered pace in 1995,

when Pakistan renovated the Kartarpur gurdwara, situated on the site on the bank of the Ravi where the founder of Sikhism, Guru Nanak, spent his last 18 years.

As a matter of fact, leaders from both sides, including Prime Ministers Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Benazir Bhutto, had pushed for it.

In their effort to facilitate travel by Sikhs to important shrines on both sides of the border, they were also alert to the potential of such a move to heal ties amongst their people, and promote dialogue between the two governments.

A role this corridor can play: o Given its easy logistics, the 4 to 6 km-long Kartarpur corridor is a low-hanging fruit as a

meaningful confidence-building measure. o Experts believe that this announcement is particularly timely, with the 550th birth

anniversary of Guru Nanak falling in November 2019. The initiative can also become a template for cross-border exchanges based on faith, which

could provide a balm for many communities such as: a. Kashmiri Pandits, who have long asked for access to visit the Sharda Peeth in the Neelum

Valley in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir; b. Sufis in Pakistan who wish to visit the dargah of Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti in Ajmer,

Rajasthan; and c. Sikhs in India and Pakistan wanting to visit important shrines on both sides of the border.

Concluding Remarks:

o Experts believe that much will depend on how quickly India and Pakistan act on their commitment. Further, even more will depend on how the two governments manage their relationship in a way that avoids making pilgrims a pawn in bilateral tensions.

o Going forward however, it is important that issues related to the corridor are managed in a non-political manner and details left to diplomats and officials to sort out — for instance, the issue of Indian consular access to pilgrims, which had recently flared up.

o Lastly, experts believe that given the bilateral freeze, the Kartarpur project will compel India and Pakistan to engage in a positive and purposeful manner, at a time when few other avenues for engagement exist. It is a reminder that dialogue and search for areas of concord are the only way forward for both countries.

Mains Practice Questions (250 words; 15 marks):

1. Discuss the significance of India’s recent participation in the Afghan peace talks. How would Pakistan’s role as a key negotiator affect India’s security interests in the region?

2. The Reserve Bank of India has been given only ‘functional independence’ under the RBI Act and not absolute autonomy. In the light of the recent attempts by the government to impinge on RBI’s independence, analyse its implications on the Indian economy.

3. Evaluate the ongoing constitutional crisis in Sri Lanka. What approach has been adopted by India to deal with political instability in the Indian Ocean Region?

4. The success and validation of GSLV-Mk-III represents a core objective for ISRO. Examine the statement by referring to the recent satellite launches and the upcoming missions of the space agency.

5. How does stubble burning affect the smog conditions in the NCR region? Suggest measures to tackle crop burning by referring to recent policy decisions and judgements of NGT and the Supreme Court.

6. Examine the evolution of LWE ideology in India by focussing on the core areas of the Red Corridor. What steps has been taken by the government to curb the menace?

7. Will India compromise on its foundational foreign policy principle of ‘strategic autonomy’ by actively taking part in the proposed ‘Quad’ grouping?

8. Examine the structural problems plaguing India’s higher judiciary and suggest ways to tackle the huge backlog of pending cases.

9. By referring to few recent judgements of the Supreme Court, evaluate whether judicial activism is turning into judicial overreach and how this would affect the Doctrine of Separation of Powers?

10. Can cultural diplomacy, soft power initiatives and enhanced people to people ties, help improve the relations between India and Pakistan? Discuss in the light of recent developments.