20 Mar 2020: UPSC Exam Comprehensive News Analysis

A. GS 1 Related

Nothing here for today!!!

B. GS 2 Related

Category: EDUCATION

1. National tag for ayurveda institute soon

What’s in News?

The Lok Sabha has passed a Bill that will accord the Jamnagar-based Institute of Teaching and Research in Ayurveda the status of ‘institution of national importance’ by clubbing the cluster of ayurveda institutes at the Gujarat Ayurveda University campus in Jamnagar.

Institute of National Importance:

• Institute of National Importance (INI) is a status that may be conferred on a premier public higher education institution in India by an act of Parliament of India.
• Institute of National Importance would be an institution which “serves as a pivotal player in developing highly skilled personnel within the specified region of the country/state”.
• More on INI in PIB dated Jan 8, 2020.

C. GS 3 Related

Category: DISASTER MANAGEMENT

1. PM calls for determination, patience and a ‘janata curfew’

Context:

The Prime Minister of India has urged Indians across the country to face the coronavirus pandemic with collective determination and patience, to make sure that “humanity and India prevails”.

Details:

• There were nine calls to action in Prime Minister Modi’s address including
  • A self-imposed ‘janata curfew’ (people’s curfew) on March 22, 2019.
  • Not to resort to panic buying.
  • Asking senior citizens to stay indoors.
  • Social distancing.
  • Avoiding elective surgery or routine health check-ups to not over burden health services.
  • Asking employers to pay employees in full when they have to stay home.
  • To stay away from rumours.
• The PM also announced the setting up of the COVID-19 task force, under the Finance Minister for measures to mitigate some of the economic hardships engendered by the pandemic.

D. GS 4 Related

Nothing here for today!!!

E. Editorials

Category: POLITY AND GOVERNANCE

1. Giving Human Rights Commissions more teeth

Protection of Human Rights Act

• It was enacted by the Indian Parliament in the year 1993.
• The Act created the National Human Rights Commission, State Human Rights Commissions in States and Human Rights Courts for better protection of human rights.
• Under Section 2(d), it defines “Human Rights” as the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed by the Constitution or embodied in the International Covenants and enforceable by courts in India.

Establishment of independent bodies

• The system of separation of powers divides the tasks of the state into three branches: legislative, executive and judicial. These tasks are assigned to different institutions in such a way that each of them can check the others.
  • Checks and balances make sure that the three powers interact in an equitable and balanced way. Read more on Separation of Powers.
• However, the complexity of governance and administration in the modern world has necessitated the existence of a set of independent bodies, which are charged with performing vital functions of oversight.
  • Some of these bodies are constitutional bodies — established by the Constitution itself. These include, for instance, the Election Commission and the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General.
  • Others have been established under law: for example, the Information Commission under the Right to Information Act, and Human Rights Commissions under the Protection of Human Rights Act.
  • The National and State Human Rights Commissions are examples of “fourth branch institutions.”

Fourth Branch

• In the Indian context, institutions of the fourth branch include the Election Commission, Lokpal, Central Bureau of Investigation, Reserve Bank, National Statistics Commission, National Human Rights Commission, Information Commission, Central Vigilance Commission, Comptroller & Auditor General, Attorney General, Public Service Commission, Finance Commission, Niti Aayog, media regulators and many others.
• It is characterized as the fourth branch of the state — because of their distinctiveness from the executive, legislature and judiciary — these institutions are tasked with the protection of key constitutional values such as democracy, legality, impartiality, probity, human rights and price stability.

Functioning of the Human Rights Commissions

• Under the Protection of Human Rights Act, the Human Rights Commissions are empowered to inquire into the violations of human rights committed by state authorities, either upon petitions presented to them, or upon their own initiative.
• While conducting these inquiries, the Commissions are granted identical powers to that of civil courts, such as examining witnesses, ordering for documents, receiving evidence, and so on.
• These proceedings are deemed to be judicial proceedings, and they require that any person, who may be prejudicially affected by their outcome, has a right to be heard.

Limitations of the Commission

• There have been the usual critiques of the politicization of autonomous bodies, and selectiveness.
• NHRC can only make recommendations, without the power to enforce decisions. This lack of authority to ensure compliance can lead to outright rejection of its decision.
  • They play an advisory role, with the government left free to disobey or even disregard their findings.
• Under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, human rights commissions cannot investigate an event if the complaint was made more than one year after the incident. Therefore, a large number of genuine grievances go unaddressed.

Context

• A case has been filed in the Madras High Court to enquire what is to be done after the Human Rights Commission completes its enquiry, and reaches a conclusion that human rights have been violated.
• A Full Bench of the High Court will be deciding upon whether “recommendations” made by the Human Rights Commissions are binding upon their respective State (or Central) governments, or whether the government is entitled to reject or take no action upon them.

What does the law say?

• Section 18 of the Protection of Human Rights Act empowers the Human Rights Commission to “recommend” to the concerned government to grant compensation to the victim, to initiate prosecution against the erring state authorities, to grant interim relief, and to take various other steps.
• The key question revolves around the meaning of the word “recommend.”

Conflicting opinions

The Full Bench of the Madras High Court is hearing the case because different, smaller benches, have come to opposite conclusions about how to understand the word “recommend” in the context of the Protection of Human Rights Act.

• According to one set of judgments, this word needs to be taken in its ordinary sense. To “recommend” means to “put forward” or to “suggest” something or someone as being suitable for some purpose. Ordinarily, a mere “suggestion” is not binding.
• Furthermore, Section 18 of the Human Rights Act also obligates the concerned government to “forward its comments on the report, including the action taken or proposed to be taken thereon, to the Commission”, within a period of one month. The argument, therefore, is that this is the only obligation upon the government.
• If indeed the Act intended to make the recommendations of the Commission binding upon the government, it would have said so: it would not simply have required the government to communicate what action it intended to take to the Commission (presumably, a category that includes “no action” as well).

Variation in ordinary meaning and Legal Meaning

Legal meaning is a function of context, and often, the purpose of the statute within which a word occurs has a strong influence on how it is to be understood.

• For example, the Supreme Court has held, in the past, that “consultation” with the Chief Justice for judicial appointments (as set out under the Constitution) be read as “concurrence” of the Chief Justice (this is the basis for the collegium system).
• Recently, while interpreting the Land Acquisition Act, the apex court held that the word “and” in a provision had to be construed as “or”.

Protecting Human Rights

• The idea of introducing such a legislation is to ensure the protection and promotion of human rights.
• To fulfil this purpose, the Act creates an institutional infrastructure, via the Human Rights Commissions. The Human Rights Commissions, thus, are bodies that stand between the individual and the state.
• If the recommendations of the Commission is not accepted and implemented, and the state is left free to obey or disobey the findings of the Commission, it would defeat the entire purpose of the Act.
• As discussed earlier, the Human Rights Commission has the powers of a civil court, and proceedings before it are deemed to be judicial proceedings. This provides strong reasons for its findings to be treated — at the very least — as quasi-judicial, and binding upon the state (unless challenged).

Indeed, in the past, courts have invoked constitutional purpose to determine the powers of various fourth branch institutions in cases of ambiguity. For example:

• The Supreme Court laid down detailed guidelines to ensure the independence of the Central Bureau of Investigation.
• Various judgments have endorsed and strengthened the powers of the Election Commission to compulsorily obtain relevant details of candidates, despite having no express power to do so.
• It is therefore clear that in determining the powers of autonomous bodies such as the Human Rights Commission, the role that fourth branch institutions are expected to play in the constitutional scheme is significant.

Conclusion

If the Human Rights Commissions are to truly protect rights in India, it needs a revamp, which way the Madras High Court holds will have a crucial impact upon the future of human rights protection in India.

For more information on the same topic, please read 23rd January 2020 Comprehensive News Analysis.

2. Counselling is the key for those in quarantine

What’s in News?

The case of a 23-year-old quarantined person jumping to death has brought into focus the importance of mental health counselling in patients undergoing isolation on the likelihood that they may be infected with COVID-19, to reassure them that quarantine does not mean they are being stigmatized.

• Mental health experts said the pandemic was creating conditions for anxiety and panic, and people with pre-existing mental health conditions such as anxiety disorders, depression, OCD, and paranoia in particular could be severely impacted.
• While quarantine has proved to be effective in controlling epidemics, it is important that the process is sensitive enough to ensure that such people do not suffer mental agony.

3. SpaceX plans first manned flight to space

What’s in News?

SpaceX will send astronauts to the International Space Station for the first time in May 2020, NASA has said, announcing the first crewed launch from the U.S. to the platform since 2011.

• Elon Musk’s firm will launch a Falcon 9 rocket to transport NASA astronauts in a first for the space agency as it looks to cut costs.

4. SEBI grants temporary relaxation to firms from disclosure norms

What’s in News?

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has granted temporary relaxation to companies from certain disclosure requirements on account of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

• The capital markets regulator said that companies would get relaxation ranging from three weeks to 45 days for certain disclosure obligations like filing quarterly and annual results, corporate governance reports and shareholding patterns among other things.

Read more about SEBI.

Q1. Consider the following statements with respect to National Human Rights Commission (NHRC):

Q2. “Negev NG-7” Light Machine Guns are being procured from:

Q3. Consider the following statements:

Q4. ‘MSME Sambandh’ is: 

Read the previous CNA here.

20 March 2020 CNA:- Download PDF Here