Assessing Juvenility a ‘Delicate Task’: SC

The Supreme Court has given some guidelines for the delicate task of deciding whether juveniles aged between 16 and 18, accused of heinous offences such as murder can be tried like adults as per the JJ Act, 2005.

Juvenile Justice Act, 2015

The JJ Act, 2015 replaced the Indian juvenile delinquency law, Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.

It allows for juveniles in conflict with Law in the age group of 16–18, involved in Heinous Offences, to be tried as adults.

The Act also sought to create a universally accessible adoption law for India.

The Act came into force from 15 January 2016.

Key features

Change in nomenclature from ‘juvenile’ to ‘child’ or ‘child in conflict with law’, across the Act to remove the negative connotation associated with the word “juvenile”

Inclusion of several new definitions such as orphaned, abandoned and surrendered children; and petty, serious and heinous offences committed by children;

Setting up Juvenile Justice Boards and Child Welfare Committees in every district. Both must have at least one woman member each.

Special provisions for heinous offences committed by children above the age of 16 years: This was in response to the juvenile convict in Nirbhaya Case.

Inclusion of new offences committed against children:  Sale and procurement of children for any purpose including illegal adoption, corporal punishment in child care institutions, use of child by militant groups, offences against disabled children and, kidnapping and abduction of children.

Penalties for cruelty against a child: Offering a narcotic substance to a child, and abduction or selling a child has been prescribed.

What is the recent Supreme Court assessment?

The “delicate task” of deciding whether juveniles aged between 16 and 18, accused of heinous offences such as murder, can be tried like adults should be based on meticulous psychological investigation.

They should not left to the discretion and perfunctory “wisdom” of juvenile justice boards and children’s courts across the country, the Court held.

What delicate tasks does the apex court is referring to?

(1) Preliminary Assessment

Section 15 of the JJ Act requires a “preliminary assessment” to be done of the mental and physical capacity of juveniles, aged between 16 and 18, who are involved in serious crimes.

The assessment is meant to gauge a child’s ability to understand the consequences of the offence and the circumstances in which he or she allegedly committed the offence.

If the Juvenile Justice Board is of the opinion that the juvenile should not be treated as an adult, it would not pass on the case to the children’s court and hear the case itself.

If the Board decides to refer the case to the children’s court for trial as an adult, the juvenile, if guilty, would even face life imprisonment.

(2) Mental capacity

The evaluation of ‘mental capacity and ability to understand the consequences’ of the child in conflict with law can should not be relegated as a routine task.

The process of taking a decision on which the fate of the child in conflict with law precariously rests, should not be taken without conducting a meticulous psychological evaluation.

The court said the Board which conducts the assessment of the child should have at least one child psychologist.

Way forward

The court discovered that there were neither guidelines nor a specific framework in place for conduct of the preliminary assessment.

The court left it open for the Centre and the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights to consider issuing guidelines or directions in this regard.

It should further take the assistance of experienced psychologists or psychosocial workers.

India’s imports from China rose to a record in first half of 2022

India’s imports from China reached a record $57.51 billion in the first half of the year, according to China’s trade figures.

India-China Bilateral Trade

China is India’s largest trading partner.

Major commodities imported from China into India were: electronic equipment; machines, engines, pumps; organic chemicals; fertilizers; iron and steel; plastics; iron or steel products; gems, precious metals, coins; ships, boats; medical, and technical equipment.

Major commodities exported from India to China were: cotton; gems, precious metals, coins; copper; ores, slag, ash; organic chemicals; salt, sulfur, stone, cement; machines, engines, and pumps.

Recent measures to curb imports from China

Blame it on the pandemic and the border dispute, but the result is the same: some Indian businesses are boycotting China.

The government is now asking Indian e-commerce companies like Flipkart and Amazon India to label country of origin for all products sold on its websites.

The govt banned many Chinese mobile applications, including top social media platforms such as TikTok, Helo and WeChat and games such as PUBG.

Can we completely boycott Chinese products?

Trade deficits are not necessarily bad: Both Indian consumers and Chinese producers are gainers through trading.

Will hurt the Indian poor the most: This is because the poor are more price-sensitive.

Will punish Indian producers and exporters: Several businesses in India import intermediate goods and raw materials, which, in turn, are used to create final goods — both for the domestic Indian market as well as the global market.

Pharma sector could be worst hit: For instance, of the nearly $3.6 billion worth of ingredients that Indian drug-makers import to manufacture several essential medicines, China catered to around 68 per cent.

Will barely hurt China: According to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) data for 2018, 15.3% of India’s imports are from China, and 5.1% of India’s exports go to China.

Chinese money funds Indian unicorns: India and China have also become increasingly integrated in recent years.

India will lose policy credibility: It has also been suggested that India should renege on existing contracts with China.

Way forward

In the long term, under the banner of self-reliance, India must develop its domestic capabilities and acquire a higher share of global trade by raising its competitiveness.

The government’s “Atmanirbhar” focus is expected to help ministries handhold industries where self-reliance needs to be built.

For the long run, a more effective strategy needs to be built to provide an ecosystem that addresses the cost disability of Indian manufacturing leading to such imports.

Election Symbol Disputes and ECI

A political party in Maharashtra has approached the Election Commission of India (ECI), requesting it to hear its side before deciding claims to the party’s bow-arrow symbol.

What is the news?

A party has lost a large number of members in the rebellion that eventually caused the fall of the government in Maharashtra.

The rebel has claimed to be the only original leader of the party on the basis of the support of more than two-thirds of the party’s legislators in the Maharashtra Assembly.

Options for ECI

The ECI in all likelihood can freeze the symbol so that neither of the two sides is able to use it until a final decision is made.

EC hearings are long and detailed, and may take at least six months.

EC’s powers in Election Symbol Dispute

The question of a split in a political party outside the legislature is dealt by Para 15 of the Symbols Order, 1968.

It states that the ECI may take into account all the available facts and circumstances and undertake a test of majority.

The decision of the ECI shall be binding on all such rival sections or groups emerged after the split.

This applies to disputes in recognised national and state parties.

For splits in registered but unrecognised parties, the EC usually advises the warring factions to resolve their differences internally or to approach the court.

How did the EC deal with such matters before the Symbols Order came into effect?

Before 1968, the EC issued notifications and executive orders under the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961.

The most high-profile split of a party before 1968 was that of the CPI in 1964.

A breakaway group approached the ECI in December 1964 urging it to recognise them as CPI(Marxist). They provided a list of MPs and MLAs of Andhra Pradesh, Kerala and West Bengal who supported them.

The ECI recognised the faction as CPI(M) after it found that the votes secured by the MPs and MLAs supporting the breakaway group added up to more than 4% in the 3 states.

What was the first case decided under Para 15 of the 1968 Order?

It was the first split in the Indian National Congress in 1969.

Indira Gandhi’s tensions with a rival group within the party came to a head with the death of President Dr Zakir Hussain on May 3, 1969.

Is there a way other than the test of majority to resolve a dispute over election symbols?

In almost all disputes decided by the EC so far, a clear majority of party delegates/office bearers, MPs and MLAs have supported one of the factions.

Whenever the EC could not test the strength of rival groups based on support within the party organisation (because of disputes regarding the list of office bearers), it fell back on testing the majority only among elected MPs and MLAs.

What happens to the group that doesn’t get the parent party’s symbol?

The EC in 1997 did not recognise the new parties as either state or national parties.

It felt that merely having MPs and MLAs is not enough, as the elected representatives had fought and won polls on tickets of their parent (undivided) parties.

The EC introduced a new rule under which the splinter group of the party — other than the group that got the party symbol — had to register itself as a separate party.

It could lay claim to national or state party status only on the basis of its performance in state or central elections after registration.

India ranks 135 out of 146 in Gender Gap Index

India ranks 135 among a total of 146 countries in the Global Gender Gap Index, 2022, released by the World Economic Forum.

What is Global Gender Gap Index?

The report is annually published by the World Economic Forum (WEF).

It benchmarks gender parity across four key dimensions or sub-indices — economic participation and opportunity, educational attainment, health and survival, and political empowerment.

It measures scores on a 0-to-100 scale, which can be interpreted as the distance covered towards parity or the percentage of the gender gap that has been closed.

The report aims to serve “as a compass to track progress on relative gaps between women and men on health, education, economy and politics”.

According to the WEF it is the longest-standing index, which tracks progress towards closing these gaps over time since its inception in 2006.

How has India fared on different sub-indices?

Here’s how it stands on different sub-indices:

(1) Political Empowerment

This includes metrics such as the percentage of women in Parliament, the percentage of women in ministerial positions etc.

Of all the sub-indices, this is where India ranks the highest (48th out of 146).

However, notwithstanding its rank, its score is quite low at 0.267.

Some of the best-ranking countries in this category score much better.

For instance, Iceland is ranked 1 with a score of 0.874 and Bangladesh is ranked 9 with a score of 0.546.

Moreover, India’s score on this metric has worsened since last year – from 0.276 to 0.267.

The silver lining is that despite the reduction, India’s score is above the global average in this category.

(2) Economic Participation and Opportunity

This includes metrics such as the percentage of women who are part of the labour force, wage equality for similar work, earned income etc.

Here, too, India ranks a lowly 143 out of the 146 countries in contention even though its score has improved over 2021 from 0.326 to 0.350.

Last year, India was pegged at 151 out of the 156 countries ranked.

India’s score is much lower than the global average, and only Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan are behind India on this metric.

(3) Educational Attainment

This sub-index includes metrics such as literacy rate and the enrolment rates in primary, secondary and tertiary education.

Here India ranks 107th out of 146, and its score has marginally worsened since last year.

In 2021, India was ranked 114 out of 156.

(4) Health and Survival

This includes two metrics: the sex ratio at birth (in %) and healthy life expectancy (in years).

In this metric, India is ranked last (146) among all the countries.

Its score hasn’t changed from 2021 when it was ranked 155th out of 156 countries.

The country is the worst performer in the world in the “health and survival” sub-index in which it is ranked 146.

Where does India stand amongst its neighbour?

India ranks poorly among its neighbours and is behind Bangladesh (71), Nepal (96), Sri Lanka (110), Maldives (117) and Bhutan (126).

Only the performance of Iran (143), Pakistan (145) and Afghanistan (146) was worse than India in South Asia.

In 2021, India ranked 140 out of 156 nations.